Social Factors Causing Burnout of Disabled Students: Views of One Group of Allies of Disabled People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burnout among students is a widely recognized concern, yet little research has focused on the experiences of disabled students and even less on the social factors at and off campus that contribute to their burnout. To address this gap, we surveyed 91 undergraduate students enrolled in a critical disability studies course at a Canadian university using an online qualitative survey approach. These students, many of whom see themselves as allies of disabled people, were asked whether they believe disabled students are at risk of burnout and what they perceive to be the causes. The majority viewed disabled students as being at significant risk, and 92% identified the social environment as the contributor. Attitudinal inaccessibility, including discrimination, stigma, and exclusion, has emerged as the leading factor in both university settings and broader societal contexts. These findings suggest that interventions to reduce burnout must address both educational environments and the wider lived realities of disabled students. This study contributes to the limited literature on burnout among disabled students and highlights the importance of ally perspectives in understanding and addressing systemic contributors to burnout.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".